Literature DB >> 19606049

Characteristics of users of online personalized genomic risk assessments: implications for physician-patient interactions.

Colleen M McBride1, Sharon Hensley Alford, Robert J Reid, Eric B Larson, Andreas D Baxevanis, Lawrence C Brody.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate what psychological and behavioral factors predict who is likely to seek SNP-based genetic tests for multiple common health conditions where feedback can be used to motivate primary prevention.
METHODS: Adults aged 25-40 years who were enrolled in a large managed care organization were surveyed. Those eligible could log on to a secure study Web site to review information about the risks and benefits of a SNP-based genetic test and request free testing. Two primary outcomes are addressed: accessing the Web (yes or no) and deciding to be tested (completed a blood draw at the clinic)
RESULTS: Those considering genetic susceptibility testing did not hold genetically deterministic beliefs (0.42 on scale of 0 [behavior] to 1 [genetic]) but believed genetic information to be valuable and were confident they could understand such information. Individuals who believed it important to learn about genetics (odds ratio = 1.28), were confident they could understand genetics (odds ratio = 1.26), and reported the most health habits to change (odds ratio = 1.39) were most likely to get tested.
CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who present to health care providers with online genetics information may be among the most motivated to take steps toward healthier lifestyles. These motives might be leveraged by health care providers to promote positive health outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19606049      PMCID: PMC3341609          DOI: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181b22c3a

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  25 in total

1.  Incorporating genetic susceptibility feedback into a smoking cessation program for African-American smokers with low income.

Authors:  Colleen M McBride; Gerold Bepler; Isaac M Lipkus; Pauline Lyna; Greg Samsa; Jennifer Albright; Santanu Datta; Barbara K Rimer
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  Meta-analysis of genetic association studies supports a contribution of common variants to susceptibility to common disease.

Authors:  Kirk E Lohmueller; Celeste L Pearce; Malcolm Pike; Eric S Lander; Joel N Hirschhorn
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2003-01-13       Impact factor: 38.330

Review 3.  Personalized medicine: decades away?

Authors:  Jeantine E Lunshof; Munir Pirmohamed; David Gurwitz
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.533

4.  The genome gets personal--almost.

Authors:  W Gregory Feero; Alan E Guttmacher; Francis S Collins
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-03-19       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Group disparities and health information: a study of online access for the underserved.

Authors:  Daniel Lorence; Heeyoung Park
Journal:  Health Informatics J       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 2.681

6.  Public health. A case study of personalized medicine.

Authors:  S H Katsanis; G Javitt; K Hudson
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-04-04       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Relationships among breast cancer concern, risk perceptions, and interest in genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility among African-American women with and without a family history of breast cancer.

Authors:  I M Lipkus; D Iden; J Terrenoire; J R Feaganes
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Education about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: patient preferences for a computer program or genetic counselor.

Authors:  M J Green; A M McInerney; B B Biesecker; N Fost
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  2001-09-15

9.  Validation of screening questions for limited health literacy in a large VA outpatient population.

Authors:  Lisa D Chew; Joan M Griffin; Melissa R Partin; Siamak Noorbaloochi; Joseph P Grill; Annamay Snyder; Katharine A Bradley; Sean M Nugent; Alisha D Baines; Michelle Vanryn
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-03-12       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  The feasibility of online genetic testing for lung cancer susceptibility: uptake of a web-based protocol and decision outcomes.

Authors:  Suzanne C O'Neill; Della Brown White; Saskia C Sanderson; Isaac M Lipkus; Gerold Bepler; Lori A Bastian; Colleen M McBride
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  69 in total

1.  Preferences for genetic and behavioral health information: the impact of risk factors and disease attributions.

Authors:  Suzanne C O'Neill; Colleen M McBride; Sharon Hensley Alford; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2010-10

2.  Users' motivations to purchase direct-to-consumer genome-wide testing: an exploratory study of personal stories.

Authors:  Yeyang Su; Heidi C Howard; Pascal Borry
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2011-05-28

3.  Genetic counseling and the ethical issues around direct to consumer genetic testing.

Authors:  Alice K Hawkins; Anita Ho
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing: a case study and practical recommendations for “genomic counseling”.

Authors:  Amy C Sturm; Kandamurugu Manickam
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Perception of direct-to-consumer genetic testing and direct-to-consumer advertising of genetic tests among members of a large managed care organization.

Authors:  Alanna Kulchak Rahm; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Nicole Wagner; Anh Quynh Le; Eve Halterman; Nadine Cornish; James W Dearing
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  "If It Helps, It's Worth a Try": an Investigation of Perceptions and Attitudes about Genetic Counseling among Southern Manitoba Hutterites.

Authors:  Amber P Gemmell; Patricia McCarthy Veach; Ian MacFarlane; Rachel Riesgraf; Bonnie S LeRoy
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Participation in genetic testing research varies by social group.

Authors:  Sharon Hensley Alford; Colleen M McBride; Robert J Reid; Eric B Larson; Andreas D Baxevanis; Lawrence C Brody
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2010-03-18       Impact factor: 2.000

8.  Parents' attitudes toward pediatric genetic testing for common disease risk.

Authors:  Kenneth P Tercyak; Sharon Hensley Alford; Karen M Emmons; Isaac M Lipkus; Benjamin S Wilfond; Colleen M McBride
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2011-04-18       Impact factor: 7.124

9.  Characteristics of genomic test consumers who spontaneously share results with their health care provider.

Authors:  Burcu F Darst; Lisa Madlensky; Nicholas J Schork; Eric J Topol; Cinnamon S Bloss
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2013-02-05

10.  Judging risk for multiple diseases: the role of disease worry.

Authors:  Ibrahim Senay; Sharon Hensley-Alford; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  J Health Psychol       Date:  2012-07-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.